Gay Marriage?

[haiqtpi]

This pie chart shows just a few consequences of gay marriage.

Oh, and (you need an account to see links) from Australia will be forced to get a divorce.

(you need an account to see links)

Interesting that they, self-identified Christians, would divorce out of protest against the government...isn't that like...putting trivial politics before oh I dont know, their God in who's name they are doing this nonsense anyways? lol Anyone who is against gay marriage, that is fine with me, that is your opinion, but attempting to say that gay marriage should NOT be allowed in terms of PUBLIC POLICY affecting anyone outside of yourself, then I have a problem. It blows my mind that people could be that against it, and it troubles me even more that politicians and radio/tv personalities perpetuate the nonsense to gullible/impressionable viewers. I have not really seen many reasons against gay marriage that aren't based in religion - as a matter of fact, said religious people are apparently the victims because their right to persecute and hate is being trampled on by gay rights activists and legislation. It is not like religion has been used in this country to also mistreat blacks, jews, or women or anything like that..... how have they not learned their lesson yet? I hate stupid people.

[Matt~]

@(you need an account to see links)

If I could like your post ten times I would.

[haiqtpi]

@(you need an account to see links)

If I could like your post ten times I would.

Aw thanks bae :-*

[kior]

LOL matt two consequences only then

---------- Post added at 12:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 AM ----------

Anyone who is against gay marriage, that is fine with me, that is your opinion, but attempting to say that gay marriage should NOT be allowed in terms of PUBLIC POLICY affecting anyone outside of yourself, then I have a problem. It blows my mind that people could be that against it, and it troubles me even more that politicians and radio/tv personalities perpetuate the nonsense to gullible/impressionable viewers.

hmm consider if gay marriage were to be allowed in a multi-racial but secular society, would it be a problem? gay marriage is not condoned in such societies precisely because religious issues might surface and cause further fissions in societal fabric, no?

[Lapis]

I'm all for gay marriage. Most of the arguments against it are half assed anyway.

[Lincoln]

On a national level I think we should really think about whether or not we want the federal government exerting this kind of control over the states. I'm not sure marriage falls under federal jurisdiction.

However, states SHOULD legalize it, and they are going to eventually, just give it some time. It's amazing to see how exponentially progress grows in terms of human rights. In the ten thousand years that humans have been on this earth, only in the last two hundred have we banned owning other human beings. Less than 150 years from that decision, a man of the race that was owned at one point is now the most powerful man on the planet, of OUR choice. While gay men were at one time burned at the stake, a trans woman is now being accepted in mainstream media as a beautiful woman, no less, and nothing different.

I'm an optimist, and god damn it's going well for human rights and equality. I have complete faith that, given a little bit of time, gay marriage will be legalized in all fifty states, as it damn well should be!

The guy that gave two points: not going to even bother quoting or tagging here. The 'studies' you're talking about are entirely falsified to support a basic claim surrounded by bigotry. Your first point is an unwarranted slippery slope argument and completely disregards the most important notion of sex: consent. Your second point is so fucked up it's incredible, a person not being procreative, if looked at objectively, is helping out. We don't need more population, we need less. Why don't we ban straight marriage in the U.S.? Oh wait. Maybe the state isn't supposed to determine why two people can and cannot be married! This revolutionary concept would hold that not only should we not start shooting straight people, but we should also allow anyone who is a consenting adult to get married.

Fuck the bigotry, love is love through and through.

[Ph0enix]

What drives me crazy is that Obama said that each state has control over it's decision to legalize it. Like wtf, people are just as gay in colorado as they are in Nevada. They are doing the same thing now with weed. It just doesn't make any sense to me!

[haiqtpi]

What drives me crazy is that Obama said that each state has control over it's decision to legalize it. Like wtf, people are just as gay in colorado as they are in Nevada. They are doing the same thing now with weed. It just doesn't make any sense to me!

That is because in this country, policy often has nothing to do with the issue at hand and more random abstract "what if-s." Basically, it's an argument that goes back to the constitutional convention when our government framework was being laid out in the wake of the failures is the Articles of Confederation. The AoC provided a very weak centralized government which had trouble enforcing its own laws, among many other issues. Despite these short comings, there was a large group of delegates who favored it over our current constitution because it established what they feared was TOO strong of s centralized government, one which was in their eyes, eerily parallel to the pre-revolutionary government under the king of England.

Sadly, to this day, the fear of a strong centralized government remains, and is a large piece of the Republican and Liberitarian political ideals. This is an example that many gun regulation opponents cite, that "the government wants to take away your automatic weapons in order to be able to strip you of your rights and ultimately establish some sort of martial state" -_- so you see, they had morons back in the late 18th century too xD

[Winona]

Many, many pages back in this thread, there was a bit of a heated discussion about the Westboro Baptist Church.

For my own two cents:
I support religious freedom, even when it makes me so angry I can't see straight, but what they're doing goes way above and beyond simple religious freedom. They're free to hate gay people in their own church, and put signs against gay people on their church's lawn, but when it turns into the awful, despicable harassment they're so well known for (protesting at funerals, for fuck's sake) that's just out of line.

Do I have a problem with people loudly and vehemently hating gay people within their own church? Yes, definitely, but that doesn't mean I can or should do anything about it. The same should go for them. Do they have a problem with gay people? Obviously. Does that mean that trying to stop them from protesting at the funerals of gay people counts as stifling their religious freedom? God, no.

Be religiously free, disagree with homosexuality, that's fine. I don't like it, but I don't have to. Nobody has to like it, if they don't want. In the name of equality, let the haters be haters and the gays be gays.

I wish marriage wasn't such a necessity for medical benefits and such and wish this wasn't such an issue in this modern day and age, but damn fuck do I support. Would love to get married to someone someday, no matter their gender.

As a bit of an aside, I may not agree with the people in this thread who have expressed their negative opinions on homosexuality, but I love it that so many of them have agreed to disagree, instead of forcing the issue of their beliefs. Thanks for keeping it civil, guys. I may not agree with you but you're clearly not bad people.

[OpTic Specs]

Nope why is this even forum it should be outlawed